July 22, 2011

1. We located the cavernous AMC multiplex within the humongous Mayfair Mall, bought a bag of popcorn bits, and found our way to theater 4 where we chose seats in the crowd of about 50 mostly older people.

2. There was no cheering or laughing during the movie, but in the end there was a big, enthusiastic round of applause.

3. As we left the theater, we encountered a man who asked us if we liked the movie and handed us a glossy card with a picture of Sarah Palin and a list of her political positions: "Drill Now, Strong Defense, Stop Spending." In the sort of way that you say "fine" when a stranger ask how are you, I said "Great!"

4. The filmmakers did not film Sarah Palin, so we see only stock footage of Sarah Palin along with some audio taken from the audio version of her book "Going Rogue." That meant we saw a lot of grainy film that made us wish we could just be home watching it on TV. (Or not watching it.) The old family-movie stills and video were nice, and Meade said they were the best part of the movie.

5. We mostly hear various Palin associates telling us about things, including quite a bit of technical material about how she dealt with the oil and gas business and politics in Alaska. I would have preferred to read about these things, because I couldn't trust that I was getting the story straight. There was never, for example, a professor in his study explaining things in a seemingly neutral way... not that I would have trusted him.

6. Throughout there was a pounding, driving music soundtrack that seemed like it wanted to make sure we were excited, but it was extremely annoying and distracting. There were also metaphorical visuals like black oil pouring into water or bombs dropping or lions chasing zebras. These visuals were undoubtedly intended to add interest and drama, but they seemed pretty amateurish. We glanced at each other and laughed a few times. But the music was no laughing matter. At one point, I leaned over and said, "This music is killing me." If I had been in that movie when I said that, you would have seen a lion leap onto a zebra.

7. The movie tried to make it seem as though the Tea Party grew out of Palin's seeming defeat in the '08 election and the Tea Party was a continuation of the Reagan revolution and Sarah Palin is a continuation of Ronald Reagan. Reagan, Palin, and the Tea Party stand most emphatically apart from establishment Republicans, who are good for just about nothing. A closeup of Mitch McConnell's waxen face makes that rather obvious.

8. There were some pretty good montages of Palin antagonists saying mean things about her. They seemed insane (and misogynistic), in part because we weren't seeing any of her supposed gaffes. It would have been interesting to explore how well the attacks matched up with her missteps, but it was nevertheless entertaining to see all that stuff strung together. Entertaining like a good YouTube video. But this, of course, is a movie in a movie theater...

9. ... which I saw for you, dear readers. I hope this list of 9 items pleases you.

@chickenlittle LOL. I didn't remember right away what that referred to, had to Google, then laughed hysterically. The Abrahamson poetry thing!

If Meade has something to add, let him do it. These are my 9 points, written after driving home, which took more than an hour. So we did bat ideas around.

Meade was particularly critical of the visual metaphor stuff. We talked about whether it's acceptable for a documentary to do that and I gave an example of Errol Morris doing some things like that. I think it's okay if it's good, but the zebra stuff and so on was... bad.

"For me, being tormented by bad, dangerous ideas is just as painful as bad music. Eventually the bad music stops, but the bad ideas seem to go on forever."

Bad ideas may be more damaging, but the problem is that they are out there affecting other people. It's not so much a problem to confront them yourself. I find bad ideas that attract other people to be extremely interesting, because I want to understand why people are drawn in. So, for example, I watched a documentary about Nazis yesterday.

A music soundtrack is something you are just hearing about and thinking about. You have to experience it. I don't subject myself to torture, though I might be interested in learning about torture.

I saw it in a less-progressive enclave surrounded by hundred of miles of the most true-believing leftists to be found anywhere.

On about 5 occasions, people started whooping it up when they played actual Palin speechifying. She said stuff that to me were part of the standard American catechism, and the audience here gasped in delight and started cheering. And quite a lot of cheering at the end. It's like they had been starved for a long time, and suddenly a banquet appeared.

And then we walked outside, to be depressed by the knowledge that everyone else we see wants to destroy that American, and replace it with progressive grey goo. Haiti, move over, we're coming to join you, the grifters are in power now.

I was disappointed. Without any real reason to expect a better produced movie, I thought it would at least be a good documentary film but it wasn't.

Using my patented "how many times did I look at my watch" method for rating movies, I gave it a 4 (with 5 being the highest number I can endure before actually getting up and leaving the theater. The music really was insane.

But I agree with Ann - the movie caused me to like Sarah Palin more not less.

I'd watch it again but only on TV and only if it meant keeping my 85 year-old mother company so she could see it and there are no good baseball games on.

1. The production values were terrible.2. It wasn't fair and balanced.

Let's see, 3 years of grinding Palin criticism and attacks from all sides, then one little pipsqueak of a movie comes out, showing a suppressed, revisionist history, and the complaint was it was advocacy.

Palin, what a loser! Can't even get people to open their wallets for a decently-made movie. Feh, it's obviously her message, we can safely ignore it now.

Did it make the case? That Palin is a far more competent executive, and a faithful American, than our dope-smoking, America "they are not my people" hating, Grifter-In-Chief?

US SF maintains a resisting torture course, as do other branches of service. No harm in asking them for observer or participant status. Plenty of Pashtun females would be happy to oblige, but that would be in subject status and you wouldn't write about it.

The last detestable movie I saw was Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd. That was it for me, I won't support Hollywood any more. I was physically grossed out for days. The critics, including Terry Teachout, of course adored it.

And the Althouse woman said to the Gadsden serpent: 'We may eat of the fruit of the trees of Olbrich garden; but Garage said, "You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of Olbrich garden, whence all State blessings fall; neither shall you blog it, lest you die.' But the Gadsden serpent said to the Althouse woman, 'You will not die. For Garage knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like Garage, knowing good and evil.' So when the Althouse woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, Meade and he ate.

Excuse my ambiguity. "Less progressive enclave" refers to where it was shown, as compared to the sea of surrounding greater progressivity.

I know nothing of Wauwatosa. All I know of WI are the rocks of Devil's Lake. I expect that wherever you go in this once-great land, the majority of people want two things: 1. your money for themselves, and 2. to tell you how to live, that you are doing it all wrong. Hence, lesser and greater.

Wow, you got all that from the movie?? Wow, loud music and what? Sounds like you just watched the trailer because that's what I saw in the trailer over on Big Hollywood. No mention of how she beat the oil big wigs and what she did to secure AK in the short time she was there? Why she stepped down and exactly who was behind all the lawsuits?? Nothing about the campaign and how she gave that old man the boost he needed? No shots of the crowds or how big those crowds were?? Nothing about how she secured the state with 12 billion for there security because she knew what a ratbastard Obama was and what he was going to do to us?? Why did you waste your time and the gas?? Well, I loved it and if you see it you will too, it gives you that feeling like when you're around decent, good, patriotic people that love something and stand for something. I think I might go see it again!!

I can understand people being indifferent to Palin; I am. I can understand people liking her; I used to. I can sort of understand why some folks totally fanboy out about her, since the field of national-level Republican personalities is kind of meh.

What I cannot wrap my mind around is being SO far gone that it is impossible, in one's mind, to make a film that is both pro-Palin AND a bad movie. It reminds me of Hollywood communists' reactions to pro-Soviet cinema: "Mission to Moscow? GENIUS!"

What I cannot wrap my mind around is being SO far gone that it is impossible, in one's mind, to make a film that is both pro-Palin AND a bad movie.

I should expand my earlier comment about "MILK". Years ago now, when that movie came out, it was talked up excitedly on these very pages as the best thing since sliced bread. link. I watched this movie on Althouse's recommend here. I mentioned earlier that both me and my wife thought it was dull enough to not even finish watching. Was not possible to make a make that was both pro-gay rights and a bad movie?

Give you another example: "My Dinner With Andre." Now everyone is of course entitled to their very own opinion regarding movies, but I have to say, and I'm being candid here, that Althouse's take on movies very rarely jibes with my own. So when someone says that a movie is bad who also says that a movie I thought was bad is so good...do you see the connection?

We're not really arguing about objective things here, revenant, so it's really not worth a dispute. Too each his own._________I do have to thank Carol_Herman here for suggesting to me to listen to Mark Twain audiobooks. These are an absolute delght!

Glad to read the review. Based on what you wrote, I do wish they would have explained why she had to quit as Governor.

Bring the quitting business up with a Palinista causes fits of rage and all sorts of chants that remaining as Governor would have brought her financial ruin even though of course I know of no other Governors who had to step down because of some lawsuits. Did they at least explain how such lawsuits magically disappeared right after stepping down? Or did they address how those five different colleges harassed her out before she could finally get her degree from the sixth?

There was never, for example, a professor in his study explaining things in a seemingly neutral way...

Yeah, that's just what I would've needed to sell me. Fucking hilarious.

There were some pretty good montages of Palin antagonists saying mean things about her. They seemed insane (and misogynistic), in part because we weren't seeing any of her supposed gaffes. It would have been interesting to explore how well the attacks matched up with her missteps, but it was nevertheless entertaining to see all that stuff strung together.

"At one point, I leaned over and said, "This music is killing me." If I had been in that movie when I said that, you would have seen a lion leap onto a zebra."

That got me. I'm still laughing.

Also, I can't really understand why nobody close to the production of this film ever said - "er.. Maybe turn/ tone it down just a bit. Because you're giving people the Clockwork Orange treatment here."

Or *why* for goodness sake, once the guy who made this movie showed it in previews to Conservative (friendly) previewers who said "Hey, we like the idea but turn/tone it down a bit." He just said: "Nah. It's Gold! Mind-Raping Gold, Jerry!"

The built-in Palinista audience was already going to come see this, schlock or not. But, If it was really good - maybe others would too... (note: I have not seen this movie, but most reviews read like Ann's).

For what it's worth, this bloggers trip to the Palin movie, regardless of her "points"...the real point..and only point that counts is that it appears she felt compelled to comment here in this thread more often than she normally comments. Palin seems to draw a response unlike any other.

And then we walked outside, to be depressed by the knowledge that everyone else we see wants to destroy that American...

So, everyone other than those in that theater at that time wants to destroy America, have I got that right? Or, to put it slightly less literally: So, everyone other than those who go to see "the Undefeated" wants to destroy America?

Or, what? What are you really trying to say--or, to choose a perhaps better term--express?

Would having gone to see "The Undefeated" be a good, shorthand litmus test for you? Seriously, would it?

Sort of like sitting "Indian Style" is now called "Criss-Cross apple sauce"

Heh. We got corrected re: that going on seven years ago, when my son started full time at a private school.

Especially since we started full-time homeschooling three years ago (the start of the fourth year is upon us), that has been something of an ongoing joke.

And, no, this doesn't mean--at all, at all--that we are anything less than respectful of native peoples or of history. It does reflect a thinking that there are better ways to focus on and teach things (not to mention to teach things and focus on them).

Bring the quitting business up with a Palinista causes fits of rage and all sorts of chants that remaining as Governor would have brought her financial ruin even though of course I know of no other Governors who had to step down because of some lawsuits. Did they at least explain how such lawsuits magically disappeared right after stepping down?"

They were not lawsuits. They were a coordinated campaign by the Democrats to file a ton of frivolous "ethics charges", most of which were completely laughable, like wearing something with a tiny designer logo on it in an official appearance. She was cleared of every one of them, IIRC.

By Alaska law, the state does not pay for the defense costs of those charged with ethics complaints. I believe there is also something in Alaska law that prevented her from setting up a defense fund and taking contributions. She had racked up about $500,000 in legal bills when she quit. While she is wealthy now, she was not then.

This is part of the leftist strategy, destroy your opponents no matter what it takes or how you have to do it.

But to tell the truth, it's pretty obvious from your tone that you already detest her anyway. I'm sure you think she's just a quitter.

At least she left honorably, unlike the Community-Organizer-in-Chief, who started running for president six months after he was elected Senator, and spent a lot of time voting "Absent".

I'm not a Palinista, but I do think she and her family were despicably brutalized by the left and the media (but I repeat myself), far beyond what I have ever seen done to any other single person in my long lifetime.

"They were not lawsuits. They were a coordinated campaign by the Democrats to file a ton of frivolous "ethics charges", most of which were completely laughable, like wearing something with a tiny designer logo on it in an official appearance. She was cleared of every one of them, IIRC."

The Blanchflower investigation, which was commissioned by a bipartisan panel, found that she had abused her office in attempting to get her brother-in-law fired.

She also had to pay back per Diem she collected while living at her home in Wasilla and expenses for using unauthorized government transportation for her family.

Okay. Let me see if I have this straight, now? At the movie theater where you ordered popcorn ... the bag was full of nibs ... As if the movie theater wasn't even popping new corn. But scraping up the bits and pieces at the bottom of the tray. And, still charging you $4?

I'd have scattered those nibs on the floor. And, for good measure would have used my feet to grind them into the floor.

Then, I'd have complained to the management about the INFERIOR NOISE. (Not blaming the movie.) But asking for my money back.

I think you reviewed the AMC Movie theater. And, not the film, itself. Where someone who voted for Obama ... could have gotten lost seeing this ... Instead of, let's say, Harry Potter.

Ebert didn't review this film well, either.

But that's expected.

Dunno what kind of a car trip it is to get to Wauwatosa. My guess is that no theater in Madison will show it. Because it won't draw in an audience. Like Harry Potter would.

How'd they get away with serving you "mostly nibs?" That's very discouraging.

Let alone, if you asked for extra butter, it would drip out of the bottom of the bag.

How hard is it to make fresh popcorn?

How come you didn't go to the management and show them what you got? Nibs aren't acceptable.

And, traveling far to see a movie you knew ahead of time you wouldn't like ... just begs the question: "Why get disappointed?"

Steve Austin said..."I do wish they would have explained why she had to quit as Governor.".

They did. Easily ten minutes of it. In both her words, and her loyal and won-over associates.

But we all know now she's a cowardly quitter who can see Alaska from Wasilla. It doesn't matter that we're hearing from people who finally had a chance to have their say. That ship has sailed. So what these people have to say is unremarkable, of no import, and since it wasn't presented fair and balanced, is not credible.

Hey Trooper, it was a good bookend. End of an era. I can't think of anything past it that keeps up in class. Released in the Bicentennial Year, the last one he made, with the glorious Lauren Bacall, who despite their personal differences, treated each other with such respect. Eastwood's last movie Gran Torino is a pale homage.

jeaneeinabottle said... No mention of how she beat the oil big wigs and what she did to secure AK in the short time she was there? Why she stepped down and exactly who was behind all the lawsuits?? Nothing about the campaign and how she gave that old man the boost he needed? No shots of the crowds or how big those crowds were?? Nothing about how she secured the state with 12 billion for there security because she knew what a ratbastard Obama was and what he was going to do to us?? [...] Well, I loved it and if you see it you will too, it gives you that feeling like when you're around decent, good, patriotic people that love something and stand for something. I think I might go see it again!!

7/22/11 7:36 PM

Yes. Jeaneeinabottle is addressing the political substance.

If "Palin deserves better," as Meade said, then why not say that Palin deserves better, and talk about her career, instead of all this round-about review of the aesthetics. The aesthetics, the quality of the production values, are a footnote. Michael Moore has been shown to be intentionally deceitful in his films (see: "Michael Moore Hates America"). The production values are not the central issue, are they?

Here is a link to a review by a left-leaning reviewer at The Huffington Post, who apparently was able to focus on the political meaning of the film. She says she wishes this were the film Hillary Clinton had made: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amy-siskind/the-undefeated-the-movie-_b_871600.html

There is a line of American conservatism that is, in out time, perhaps most brightly expressed by Ronald Reagan, and some aspects of that bright, hard-working, optimistic, deeply-felt, principle-based, idealistic-and-yet-practical conservatism do appear in the Tea Party and in Sarah Palin, among others.

All this hatred and disdain against Palin, I think, is triggered by that--

Because people love that Reagan-like goodness, clarity and putting the country first, and this demoralizes the Left and causes them to lose elections, power, patronage, and, hence, their incomes. This, of course, is intolerable to the Left. Ergo, the hatred and disdain.

YMMV, but that's how it looks to me, and I say thank you to Jeaneeinabottle for her warmth & enthusiasm.

Oh, and also a huge thank-you to Meade and Ann for their reporting during the seige of Madison. Althouse became a go-to blog for me during that time.

And -- an aside to any who may be toying with the notion that Wisconsin is formerly-great: we're fighting this "unions' last stand" thing, and Wisconsin is entering a newly-great again time, IMHO. Wisconsin's going to be ok, which means it's going to be great.

Oh, and also a thanks to Ann for the wonderful photos. So nice to have something sublime, beautiful, poignant, funny, sweet as a contrast. And for being willing to think, and for asking others to think.

People only watch one movie anymore: the small human who must face down monstrous political figures, who'd usher in a different form of governance. The template was set by Star Wars, with Luke playing the American interest, to the larger Nazi threat. Palin debuted against the end of Potter, another Star Wars/Nazi tribute, as "The Undefeated" was widely mocked by liberals in reference to "Triumph of the Will." They were all saying that, as if Palin is a new Hitler. The Nazi vs. hero plotline is a cultural obsession. Potter is over now, but even after everything he did & suffered, there's no feeling that the evil is finished. We'll go see the same struggle again next week, and the week after that.

reader_iam want's to know why I have very poor opinion of my neighbors.

I live in a State financially on the ropes, shedding businesses and people at a horrific rate to its neighbors. The very few remaining Republican districts are very competitive. The vast majority of Democratic districts win with crushing margins. The State and local governments are hopelessly corrupt, still hiring workers and voting themselves raises and bonuses, They spend public wealth on their friends, while refusing to perform their sworn duties. It is like the darkest days of Anbar province in 2005 and 2006. This can only end badly.

The only thing you can conclude from my watching The Undefeated, is that I want information. What my opinion is, is unimportant. Our family's fate is entirely at the mercy of our neighbor's scruples. We can only move away and give up on our chosen careers, which can only be done here.

If you must know, I consider the DoI and CotUSA to be the noblest legal documents ever produced by the hand of man. We will not see their like again.

You mean what we are seeing with this debt ceiling issue? No concern shown for the damage that will be done to the country if the government defaults.

"...Because people love that Reagan-like goodness, clarity and putting the country first..."

When Lee Atwater, mentor to Karl Rove and one of the gurus of Reagan and then Bush I's campaigns, was dying of brain cancer, he had such an epiphany about the world he helped to create. He called the umitigated greed of the Reagan/Bush era a "spiritual vacuum at the heart of American society, this tumor of the soul."

"When Lee Atwater, mentor to Karl Rove and one of the gurus of Reagan and then Bush I's campaigns, was dying of brain cancer, he had such an epiphany about the world he helped to create. He called the umitigated greed of the Reagan/Bush era a "spiritual vacuum at the heart of American society, this tumor of the soul."

You make the gravest of assumptions--actually, outright mistakes--if you think my family doesn't know something about hard times, economic hard times, and even unemployment.

Our family's fate is entirely at the mercy of our neighbor's scruples.

If you say so.

We can only move away

Join the club! It's a venerable one, and assuming you know something about American history, a longstanding one.

and give up on our chosen careers

Well, hell, that shit happens. Right? We've been told for years that's normal, and in recent years, precisely what people need to do, when and as necessary.

which can only be done here.

Must not be a growth industry, much less something sustainable. Hey, it's a global economy! Get over it. Pick something else you can do there or move.

----

Listen, andinista, I'm far more sympathetic, empathetic, knowledgeable and understanding than, clearly, you know. That said, if you want me to take you more seriously, you need to demonstrate that you appreciate the likes of me and my family--who will move where we have to, take the work that we have to, in order to remain independent and as self-sufficient as possible--before we'll accept that you are a better example of conservatism than I.

In 1981, Atwater talked about the GOP's Southern Strategy and Ronald Reagan's version of it:

"You start out in 1954 by saying, 'Ni**er, ni**er, ni**er.' By 1968 you can't say 'ni**er' — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now that you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is that blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, 'We want to cut this,' is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than 'Ni**er, ni**er'."

I reckon you are. I don't vote for conservatives. Conservative politicians take public money and spend it on their friends, while refusing their duty. Then try to tell you how to live your life, what you can and can't do and think, what is right and wrong, That's how I see it, I'm afraid. I'm not sure the distinction between conservative politician, and personal conservative. The one votes for the other. I don't doubt your rectitude and honor, and yet ...

This State is dying. I won't run. I do what I can to work for a rebirth.

Believing greatly in Gov. Palin, I was initially disappointed at your post seeing that you reserved the critique strictly to stage-craft and such. Finding comments by yourself and Meade stating the positive impact the movie had on your affinity to the governor, I am actually quite pleased. and grateful. Thank you for taking the time, and for keeping your head, both in the evaluation and in the presentation of your "verdict". The latter is quite a performance in keeping all of our readers happy, withouth betraying your true feeling.

It would be fun to make a movie filled with examples of left-wing hate and misogyny. There are endless examples from Bill Maher, Olbermann and many hardcore leftist blogs. Pepper the movie with pro-commie Hollywood spittle, and some Jane Fonda action and, well, America would be stunned. Someone could read a Paul Krugman NYT opinion piece as an over-lay. Viola - the modern hardcore whack job left.

I never forget you're an Obama voter, Althouse. That accounts for why you go heavy on negative criticism but totally fail to explain why this really horrible documentary with its annoying music made you like Palin at the end. If it truly did that, then the documentary was effective because what you never touch is that Bannon did what he set out to fo: set the record straight on Palin's record, and, by extension, the Obama Socialists demonization of and sheer lies about her.

Hey Trooper, it was a good bookend. End of an era. I can't think of anything past it that keeps up in class. Released in the Bicentennial Year, the last one he made, with the glorious Lauren Bacall, who despite their personal differences, treated each other with such respect. Eastwood's last movie Gran Torino is a pale homage."

You are mixed up. "The Shootist" was the movie you are recalling.

"The Undefeated" was with Rock Hudson, Merlin Olsen, Roman Gabriel and Lee Meriwether. It was direct by Andrew V. McLaglen who was the son of Victor McLaglen and who direct much of the Duke's later work. They include several of John Fords old stock company like Ben Johnson, Harry Carey Jr, John Agar and Dub Taylor as well as the ubiquitous Jan-Michael Vincent.

It is loosely based on the attempt by Confederate General Shelby's attempt to go to Mexico to join with Maximilian's army that was in Mexico.

An entertaining but pedestrian flick it is still much more entertaining family viewing that 99% of the crap that Hollywood passes today.

Popcorn was lunch. It was the 1:20 show. We left without even shopping at the many mall stores -- except to the extent that, exiting through Barnes & Noble, we glanced at a few books and magazines. We went right to the car and drove home. Later, we cooked dinner at home. It wasn't really a big Friday out. We just wanted to see the movie... and not really for fun. It was mostly part of the long art-politics project called "Althouse."

Althouse provides what she went there looking for. Things that she could comment on that would plese her readers.

Althouse totally misses the story, it seems, of an ordinary woman who has done extrordinary things in her life. Certainly Palin has achieved much more than critic Althouse, who I am shure would pleased to share her accomplishments.

The movie is also makes clear what vision, passion, and commitment can do. Even Ann Althouse's meaningless "review" shows that.

I do agree that the music is a bit music at times, but in the second viewing it seemed to fit better. Maybe second looks do provide a different experience.

After listening to the President’s press conference today, let’s keep in mind the following:

This is the same president who proposed an absurdly irresponsible budget that would increase our debt by trillions of dollars, and whose party failed to even put forward a budget in over 800 days! This is the same president who is pushing our country to the brink because of his reckless spending on things like the nearly trillion dollar “stimulus” boondoggle. This is the same president who ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations and demonized the voices of fiscal sanity who proposed responsible plans to reform our entitlement programs and rein in our dangerous debt trajectory. This is the same president who wanted to push through an increase in the debt ceiling that didn’t include any cuts in government spending! This is the same president who wants to slam Americans with tax hikes to cover his reckless spending, but has threatened to veto a bill proposing a balanced budget amendment. This is the same president who hasn’t put forward a responsible plan himself, but has rejected reasonable proposals that would tackle our debt. This is the same president who still refuses to understand that the American electorate rejected his big government agenda last November. As I said in Madison, Wisconsin, at the Tax Day Tea Party rally, “We don’t want it. We can’t afford it. And we are unwilling to pay for it.”

Now the President is outraged because the GOP House leadership called his bluff and ended discussions with him because they deemed him an obstruction to any real solution to the debt crisis.

He has been deemed a lame duck president. And he is angry now because he is being treated as such.

His foreign policy strategy has been described as “leading from behind.” Well, that’s his domestic policy strategy as well. Why should he be surprised that he’s been left behind in the negotiations when he’s been leading from behind on this debt crisis?

I just returned from a special showing in Chicago, at the Siskell film center, no less. I confess I had expected to see a poorly produced movie, but was impressed with the production value. Is it possible the sound issue is a theatre issue rather than production issue?

Regarding the story/message--again I expected to see much more of a politcal tract, but was impressed at a simple story of a normal child of the 70s who decided, multiple times, to not "go along to get along" but, instead, stand up and put everything on the line for what's right.

Steve Bannion, the director/producer, did a Q&A afterwards. He, too, was not the fiery idealouge I had expected but rather a fairly humble, unassuming guy with a story to tell.

I do agree that there were too many TV video clips that end up looking grainy on the big screen. I think doing a split screen / quarter screen thing would have been more effective. It definately will look better on the small screen.

Overall, I came away convinced that not only will Sarah Palin run but that her whole life has prepared her for such a time as this. She may win this time, or maybe the next, but I'm convinced she'll not only end up as president some day, she'll help steer the country back to its roots.

"Overall, I came away convinced that not only will Sarah Palin run but that her whole life has prepared her for such a time as this."

Based on the interviews and debate, Palin didn't seem that prepared during the 2008 campaign. And that was while she was a sitting governor. Since she is no longer in an executive position, how is she increasing her experience as a political (not cult)leader?

"She may win this time, or maybe the next, but I'm convinced she'll not only end up as president some day, she'll help steer the country back to its roots."

Given her approval rating, would be surprised if she did run. I don't think she will win the independent vote. What roots will she steer the country back to?

"The Blanchflower investigation, which was commissioned by a bipartisan panel, found that she had abused her office in attempting to get her brother-in-law fired."

Branchflower did not have jurisdiction to discipline Palin. The board that did have such jurisdiction cleared her and said Branchflower completely misapplied the law. That was a political show trial. You can look at the email trove for corroboration: Monegan was insubordinate on multiple occasions and she was well within her rights to fire him.

"She also had to pay back per Diem she collected while living at her home in Wasilla and expenses for using unauthorized government transportation for her family."

This has several errors in it. She did not pay back (and was not asked to) per diems collected while living in Wasilla instead of 500 miles away in Juneau at the Governor's Mansion. She didn't have to repay travel and per diem charges for family members traveling with her, but she did anyway to settle that charge without admitting fault. It should be noted that it was commonplace for her predecessors in the governor's mansion to have family members travel with them at taxpayer expense, and that Palin's expense budget was 80% less than Murkowski's. But she cared about getting it right and agreed to repay some of the charges.

"Based on the interviews and debate, Palin didn't seem that prepared during the 2008 campaign."

She was well prepared for the debate. I would like to see the hours of uncut footage from the Couric interview to see why the tone was so hostile between them but CBS will not release it.

"And that was while she was a sitting governor. Since she is no longer in an executive position, how is she increasing her experience as a political (not cult)leader?"

You betray yourself with the adjective "cult". Her problem in 2008 was not that she was an incompetent leader but that she was up only on issues that affected Alaska, not necessarily issues affecting the rest of the nation. She has read, written and spoken extensively on national political issues over the past two years and is ready for a presidential run.

“Branchflower did not have jurisdiction to discipline Palin. The board that did have such jurisdiction cleared her and said Branchflower completely misapplied the law. That was a political show trial. You can look at the email trove for corroboration: Monegan was insubordinate on multiple occasions and she was well within her rights to fire him.”

The Alaska Legislative Council, which commissioned Branchflower to conduct the investigation into Monegan's dismissal, is a bipartisan body of state House and Senate members who can convene to make decisions when the full Legislature is not in session. They can certainly initiate an inquiry to determine the facts of a given situation. In this case the Branchflower report determined Palin abused her office in attempting to get her brother-in-law fired after he had already been disciplined for the incident Palin claimed he should be fired for. The other panel that investigated this issue and found that Palin had done no wrong was composed of three individuals who all served at the pleasure of the governor and could be fired for cause. There was a lot of conflict of interest with that investigation.

“This has several errors in it. She did not pay back (and was not asked to) per diems collected while living in Wasilla instead of 500 miles away in Juneau at the Governor's Mansion. She didn't have to repay travel and per diem charges for family members traveling with her, but she did anyway to settle that charge without admitting fault. It should be noted that it was commonplace for her predecessors in the governor's mansion to have family members travel with them at taxpayer expense, and that Palin's expense budget was 80% less than Murkowski's. But she cared about getting it right and agreed to repay some of the charges.”

Actually Palin had to pay taxes on the per diem she collected while living at home: http://www.accountingtoday.com/news/30790-1.html

My point is why did she double dip on the tax payers? She was provided a mansion in the capital at tax payer expense. She elected not to use the governor mansion for her own reasons and colleted per diem while living in her own home. Per diem is for travel purposes, not for living in your own quarters. She doesn’t look very fiscally responsible.

Palin was also hit for not paying taxes for several years on her vacation lodges that ended up being appraised at over $100K. You would think a governor of a state would know about paying her property taxes, unless she was deliberately trying to avoid doing so.

“On no charge was she "convicted."

Neither was O.J. Simpson. I would suggest, that although she may not have been formally “convicted” by the ethics board, she has been convicted in the public eye. She doesn’t come across as being very honest.

“She was well prepared for the debate. I would like to see the hours of uncut footage from the Couric interview to see why the tone was so hostile between them but CBS will not release it.”

I respectively disagree. She appeared to be spouting talking points vice thoughtful answers to the questions posed during the debate. As far as the Couric interview, why so much difficulty with relatively simple questions? She couldn’t even remember the Exxon Valdez case which occurred in her own state and which the Supreme Court just decided that summer?

“You betray yourself with the adjective "cult". Her problem in 2008 was not that she was an incompetent leader but that she was up only on issues that affected Alaska, not necessarily issues affecting the rest of the nation.

Yes, I think this Palin fascination is almost cult-like. If she wasn’t up on issues that affected the rest of the nation, maybe she shouldn’t have been picked as a candidate for Vice President which could have led to her becoming President. Hence my belief this is more of a cult following then a following based on rationale thinking.

“She has read, written and spoken extensively on national political issues over the past two years and is ready for a presidential run.”

If she’s ready, then why does she never appear on any of the Sunday panels where she will have to address issues without the benefit of prearranged questions? What is she afraid of?